Callable assertion?

[Erik Max Francis]

Definitely yes. There are a few strange objects that are callable and
do not have a __call__.

I wouldn't call class objects all that strange .

 

[Gonçalo Rodrigues]

I wouldn't call class objects all that strange .

Classic classes, yes. I started using Python at 2.2 and *never* have
used classic classes, so yes, they are like those distant, eccentric
and embarassing uncles whose only useful purpose in life seems to be
to disparage the uncomfortable silence in some boring family
get-togethers by recalling some odd anecdote or other of his misspent
life.

With my best regards,
G. Rodrigues

 

[Greg Ewing (using news.cis.dfn.de)]

I wouldn't call class objects all that strange .

It is strange behaviour, though, considering
.... pass
....['__delattr__', '__setattr__', '__repr__', '__call__', '__str__',
'__getattribute__', '__new__']

so according to C's type, it *should* have a __call__ method.
I'm not sure exactly what's going on here.

 

[Alex Martelli]

_CLASSIC_ classes are very strange indeed, for backwards compat.

It is strange behaviour, though, considering
... pass
...['__delattr__', '__setattr__', '__repr__', '__call__', '__str__',
'__getattribute__', '__new__']

so according to C's type, it *should* have a __call__ method.
I'm not sure exactly what's going on here.

BW compat -- type(C) (i.e <type 'classobj'>) is the weirdest
little beast in Pythonland.

Use newstyle classes only and keep your sanity...:


Alex